As reports regarding synthetic turf health risks flooded in -- instead of hitting the pause button -- the City Fields Foundation "Team" (CFF) and their political supporters instigated their most aggressive deceptions to date. Chemicals in the styrene butadiene (SBR) synthetic turf had been found by the State of California to be "known to cause cancer". Presently, San Francisco has introduced well over twelve million pounds, (6390 tons), of petroleum derived carbon black ultra-fine particles into the City environment and public spaces by its use of SBR synthetic turf alone -- this does not include any of the hundreds of other additional chemicals which make up SBR.

In the spring of 2014, a coalition of citizens started collecting signatures to put on the November ballot an initiative [Prop H] that would require the City to renovate seven acres in the western part of Golden Gate Park with grass, (not SBR artificial turf).

The validity of San Francisco's reporting of the SBR synthetic turfs' toxic health impacts, (including cancer risks), was still being adjudicated in the State Superior Courts of California by Appeal. (chapter 16). The City attorney had applied for and gotten an extension which postponed the hearing until after the November ballot vote.

Newsom applauding Mayor Ed Lee

In June, -- at the virtual last minute -- a preemptive strike [Prop I] to the citizen initiative was announced by San Francisco Mayor, Ed Lee, (Gavin Newsom's successor), as he surrounded himself with children in soccer uniforms.

The "SF Examiner" reported, "as opponents [of one of the SBR installations], are gathering signatures to place a measure on the November ballot that would block the artificial turf project, Lee has announced his intention to place a measure on the November ballot today that does the exact opposite".

Judge Kopp explains [click pic for video]

In reality, the counter ballot measure [Prop I] was submitted by one of Phil Ginsburg's staff from the Recreation & Park Department -- CFF "Team" member Hannan is listed as its main contact. It was signed off by Supervisors Chiu, Wiener, Mar, Tang, and Farrell. One of the primary functions of the measure is to prevent public's right to challenge an EIR, (environmental impact report), in court if it is approved by the Board of Supervisors -- exactly like the EIR currently being challenged in the Superior Courts of California.. Judge Quentin Kopp described the CFF and politicians's last minute submission as, "a deceptive and detestable technique by City Hall."

The cleverly written measure -- what the San Francisco Chronicle described as "a poison pill" - was in part designed to wipe out the citizens' initiative. CFF had wrapped their SBR synthetic turf projects inside two other, (vague), vote enticing issues -- they titled their ballot measure , “Children’s Playgrounds, Walking Trails, and Athletic Fields”. The authors buried in their Prop I ballot measure wording that would trump and kill the citizen initiative [Prop H] if their ballot measure [Prop I] garnered more voter responses overall -- even if the other initiative passed.

CFF's Hirsch, Ginsburg, Bill & John Fisher

Proposition I - the CFF sponsored ballot measure states; "This Initiative will be deemed to conflict with any other measure appearing on the same ballot relating to the same subject matter, including any measure relating to installing artificial turf or nighttime lighting on City athletic fields. In the event that this initiative and any other such measure(s) are approved by the voters at the same election, and this Initiative receives a greater number of votes than any other such measure(s), this initiative shall control in its entirety and the other measure(s) shall be rendered void and without legal effect.” In other words, their separate, broad scoping, initiative could nullify the citizen initiative. By putting their wrecking initiative on the same ballot for a popular vote, CFF, Ginsburg, and their political allies were also positioning themselves to shirk their responsibility and liability for their project's potential toxic consequences -- before the Superior Court of California could adjudicate SBR’s health and environmental risks.

Fisher at NRDC

Ironically, the very same day that the poison pill initiative had been introduced, Bob Fisher wa﻿﻿s collecting an award from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) for "his leadership in sustainable initiatives and passion for a more environmentally friendly future".

The Chronicle wrote that at the NRDC ceremony Fisher, admitted to lying for the greater good. "Even though my term has expired," he said, with a laugh, "I will always tell people I'm a board member."

19 – WHEN IS A GIFT NOT REALLY A GIFT?– Buying an Election

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "The Fisher brothers were major donors to the campaign in favor of Prop. I" - the poison pill. In fact -- according to the City and County of San Francisco November 2014 election’s Voter Information Pamphlet -- the Fisher brothers funded multiple paid arguments attached to both of the voter the ballots. (listed below...)

The Foundation listed in support of their poison pill ballot measure a host of Democratic Party organizations and party members; Gavin Newsom, GM-Phil Ginsburg, Mayor Ed Lee -- City Supervisors President David Chiu, London Breed, Malia Cohen, Mark Farrell, Jane Kim, Eric Mar, Katy Tang, Scott Wiener, and Norman Yee. The sphere of influence of the billionaire brothers and City Fields Foundation was such that family friend -- U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein signed off as the author of the primary argument in favor of their sponsored poison pill initiative in the Voter Information Pamphlet.

Hirsch meeting with Chiu before vote

During the same election period, City Supervisor President David Chiu was running to upgrade his position from president of the city Board of Supervisors to a seat in the state Assembly. San Francisco Magazine reported that members of the Fisher family had contributed over $24,000 toward Chiu's campaign which he ultimately won.Minutes before the meeting of the San Francisco Democratic Committee vote to determine their ballot endorsements -- Chiu met with CFF director and Fisher family financial adviser Hirsch. Immediately following at the meeting he publicly instructed the Committee members to vote against the citizen initiative [Prop H] and in favor of the CFF sponsored wrecking ballot measure [Prop I].

Chiu presiding at Board of Supervisors

Weeks leading up to the November vote, a children's health care advocate was tipped off by Board staff that Chiu had said that he may block the advocates comments regarding synthetic turf at the Board of Supervisors meetings. As forewarned, at three attempts in a row when the advocate tried to present to the meeting visuals showing the SBR cancer connection -- under Chiu's oversight -- the advocate's presentation was either not shown or the advocate was interrupted by Chiu as he tried to speak.

A four page mail-out paid for by the Fisher brothers.

For the campaign the Fisher brothers financed multiple 4-page city-wide mail-outs as well as a full page ad in the San Francisco Chronicle that ironically proclaimed their pro-styrene butadiene synthetic turf ballot measure [Prop I], as insuring “safer”, “greener, cleaner parks”.

Video ads were produced and an airplane was even hired to circle the city during a Giants playoff game hauling a "Yes on I" banner.

Despite the fact that the heavily funded pro-CFF poison pill Initiative was skewed to prevail -- in July the SF Chronicle piled on -- belittling the citizen initiative. In his column, C.W. Nevius -- one of the staunchest supporters of the CFF agenda -- went so far as to stoop to calling CFFs opposition names. Thinly veiled as a column about voter initiatives -- Nevius disparaged the citizens without any mention of the SBR cancer connection, or of the years of controversial political maneuvering by the City Fields Foundation and their lobbyists.

Weeks later, Nevius dedicated another column to support the CFF projects that cited a spokesperson from Phil Ginsburg’s staff as his “fact check” source -- this time concocting wildly bizarre claims and then responding with equally bizarre "facts" -- i.e. "99 percent of New York City playing fields use crumb rubber", (ludicrously exaggerated), and obscuring NYC's moratorium on SBR.

In Nevius' attempt to downplay the toxicity issue, he simply referenced a New York government literature review about which, in fact, the California Office of Health Hazard Assessment had cautioned; “The air above fields was NOT tested for airborne metals. The previously reported finding of lead in dust sampled from some artificial turf fields indicates a potential for lead and other metals to become suspended in the air and possibly inhaled.” -- and -- “Only two outdoor artificial turf fields were evaluated in the New York State (2009) study...chemical concentrations were consistently higher in the New York State (2009) study, ranging from 1.7-fold to 85-fold higher”.

Devoutly, Nevius was at it once again, one week before the City vote with another column-- energetically campaigning for the reputations of the Fisher brothers, Mark Buell, and the Recreation and Parks Department, portraying all as victims -- and completely transcending their cover up of the SBR/cancer concerns.